MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2092479739 · doi:10.1080/09602010500176757

Treating anomia in semantic dementia: Improvement, maintenance, or both?

2006· article· en· W2092479739 on OpenAlex

Why this work is in the frame

A frame that forgets how it found something cannot be audited. These are the routes that admitted this work.

affAt least one author lists a Canadian institution in the pinned OpenAlex snapshot.

Bibliographic record

VenueNeuropsychological Rehabilitation · 2006
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldNeuroscience
TopicNeurobiology of Language and Bilingualism
Canadian institutionsUniversity of OttawaBaycrest HospitalUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDementiaPsychologySemantic dementiaCognitive psychologyPsychiatryPsychotherapistMedicineDiseaseFrontotemporal dementia

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

A treatment programme for AK, an anomic patient with semantic dementia is described. The programme was based on home practice and resulted in re-learning the names of some objects AK could not name and/or comprehend prior to the treatment. The effects of treatment were still present one month post-treatment for items that AK could not name but could comprehend prior to treatment. In addition to items that AK could not name, items that she could both understand and name were also included in the programme. This allowed us to evaluate the influence of practice on the retention of words that appeared to be intact at the outset of the investigation. Results indicated that practice delayed the progression of loss. In addition, the programme was designed jointly with AK who made many important decisions related to treatment.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.927
Threshold uncertainty score0.579

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.299
Teacher spread0.280 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it